Re: no fate but what we make
We've had a lot of speculation, but here's what I would actually do. I have no idea how typical I am. I realize that I'm not as bothered by the APS sensor because I'm not an ultrawide angle fan. I've used the 20-35 on my MZ-S but don't use it that often on 20. OTOH, I have a Tokina 80-200 f2.8 which is now an excellent sports lens. Yes, I know I this is not a real magnification effect etc., but my point is that I am happy with the FOV my old lenses now have. I would also be perfectly happy to buy a FF sensor camera, but it would have to get much cheaper to tempt me. If the *istD where $600 and the FF version were $1350, would I spend the extra? Probably not. The original $1350 for the current APS *ist D got me digital capabilities in the first place, which was a major change over my then current cameras. I'm not sure how much I would pay for a bigger sensor when the APS version seems to suit my needs just fine. I'd probably invest the money in a lens. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: no fate but what we make
Somebody said 15 years. I consider that a long time by today's standards. But seriously folks. The APS sensor is always going to be cheaper. It will be the basis of the cameras that are in high volume price range between $300-700. Once there are lenses out there at the wide end (and the 14 is wide enough for most folks) the FF sensor will have to offer such a massive increase in performance that you'll feel the need to switch. With the lenses out there, however, the makers will feel a need to keep the format alive. Remember, they wanted this format with film but there wasn't any real advantage over 35 mm. And if you never go higher than 8x10, I doubt you'll think the investment is worth it. No art here, just business. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: Steve Desjardins Subject: Re: no fate but what we make . Once there are lenses out there at the wide end (and the 14 is wide enough for most folks) Most people want telephotos, not wide angles anyway. Thats why there were so many zooms that go to 300mm or more, and not so many that were wider than 24mm until the APS digital sensors made shorter focal lengths necessary. For most consumers, the APS sensor size is a benefit, since their telephotos just got longer. William Robb
Re: no fate but what we make
15 years was what I said, and it wasn't a very carefully calculated time span. However, consider this. It is inevitable that digital sensors will in time be able to output more and more pixels. Therefore, if the APS sensor does get replaced in time, it won't be by a larger sensor. It is possible that manufacturers could try using a smaller sensor, but to what advantage? I like modestly-sized cameras, but even for me, the *ist D is quite small enough. I wouldn't buy a smaller camera because it just wouldn't be easy to operate. Aside from the non-issue of in-camera sharpening, nearly all the criticisms of the *ist D revolve around size problems - the 4-way button is too small; the card is hard to get out; it interferes with the strap; it's difficult to operate the aperture ring on older lenses because of the pentaprsm overhang; the lcd is small. All these are size issues. Nobody wants a smaller camera. I think APS may be with us in various flavours for a very long time. John On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 14:03:27 -0500, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Somebody said 15 years. I consider that a long time by today's standards. But seriously folks. The APS sensor is always going to be cheaper. It will be the basis of the cameras that are in high volume price range between $300-700. Once there are lenses out there at the wide end (and the 14 is wide enough for most folks) the FF sensor will have to offer such a massive increase in performance that you'll feel the need to switch. With the lenses out there, however, the makers will feel a need to keep the format alive. Remember, they wanted this format with film but there wasn't any real advantage over 35 mm. And if you never go higher than 8x10, I doubt you'll think the investment is worth it. No art here, just business. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: no fate but what we make
Perhaps they do only need to introduce one, Vic -- but that's not where I was going with my comment. Mine was in response to the implication that Pentax was moving more toward DSLRs and away from digital PS cameras. To me, if a company is concentrating on SLRs and moving away from PS cameras, they'd probably be producing a few different kinds of SLRs, and the number and variety of PS models would be diminishing. But no! Pentax has introduced ONE DSLR. Admittedly, it was introduced recently, and admittedly it has had good press and seems popular with the folks who bought it but still it's only one. In the time since the introduction of the *istD, how many Optio models have they introduced? They seem to announce a couple more every month! ERN It's the Optio sales that are funding the RD into DSLR's Bill
Re: no fate but what we make
announcing more doesn't mean they are selling more. the market shelf life of a PS digicam is a lot shorter than a DSLR. that's one incentive for abandoning the digital PS market. in a commodity market, the one with the highest production volume wins because their cost per unit is lower. 2 and 3 megapixel digital cameras are a commodity and 4 is almost becoming one. Herb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 12:18 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make In the time since the introduction of the *istD, how many Optio models have they introduced? They seem to announce a couple more every month!
Re: no fate but what we make
On 16/3/04, PENTAX CLOVER LEAF disgorged: The gist of it was that the *istD is the smallest Ok, but it is more a pleasure for women than men, who always need big things to feel great This has always been my experience. 8-D Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: no fate but what we make
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps more people would buy it WITH compatability. I'd love to see the snip and any lens that mounts will work with full functionality). Har! Kostas
Re: no fate but what we make
On 17/3/04, PENTAX CLOVER disgorged: the Canon 10D has plastic chassis but Magnsium ouside cover This is wrong. From DPReview: Magnesium alloy body The EOS-D30/D60 had a metal substructure but a plastic main body. The EOS-10D now has robust magnesium alloy body which is cool to the touch, just like the EOS-1D/1Ds. Lets get the facts right please. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: no fate but what we make
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But with big and heavy lens, I prefer to use the grip and load 8 AA . ( I plan to plan next year, the 300mm FA f/:2.8 ) Are you planning to hand-hold a 300/2.8, shooting subjects of 450mm equivalent? Interesting! Kostas
Re: no fate but what we make
My friend Marc Williams, who wrote a very positive note about the *ist-D on the Leica forum, much preferred my *ist-D to his 10D. His main working camera is a 1D-S, but he used the 10D as a travel camera and backup. He has since sold it and is thinking of buying an *ist-D and a couple of Pentax lenses just for travel. He thought the *ist-D viewfinder was brighter than any of his Canons and much prefered the feel of the camera to the 10D. Paul On Mar 16, 2004, at 11:05 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. *istD is better built, having a metal chassis instead of a plastic one. That's enough reason for me right there. I am talking about it, comparing with a Canon 10D. My friends found the Pentax cheap built... Feeling metal makes thought it is metal inside. That is why Canon is great, vapor outside... 2. *istD has better viewfinder (.95x instead of .75x magnification) but still not 100% coverage (that is something which cause me big trouble) 3. *istD has pentaprism instead of pentamirror Can you tell me which DSLR has pentamirror ? ( I really do not know, I just remember abour MZ6-ZX6 pentamirror, but better finder than the MZ3 ) 4. I like Pentax glass and their SMC Sure, I also like (I am an owner of 35mm FA f/:2, 50mm FA f/:1.4, 85mm FA f/:1.4 and also 43mm limited , and used to own 20mm FA, 20-35mm FA, 80-200mm FA etc...) 5. *istD has the best battery grip The deph test is the best one, because you can use it on the grip, I agree !!! 6. *istD has HyperProgram and HyperManual modes As I already answered 7. *istD has a PC socket What is this ??? 8. *istD has MLU with the self timer And coming soon the FREE Pentax Remote software 9. *istD is the smallest and lightest DSLR But with big and heavy lens, I prefer to use the grip and load 8 AA . ( I plan to plan next year, the 300mm FA f/:2.8 ) 10. *istD, even with firmware 1.0, still works fine with my screwmount lenses. Much more : I can go on using the ring with FA lens !!! There's ten reasons right there. Give me another 20 seconds and I can give you another ten. I can give you 20 seconds more !!! I wish people would stop slamming Pentax when they finally put out an impressive camera for a comparatively cheap price. The problem is not only buyers, but also sellers. In France, they are reluctant to sell Pentax stuff... Sure, Canon and Nikon will focus quieter and a bit faster if you buy their ultra-pricey USM/AF-S lenses, and IS/VR is certainly a cool feature, but how many people need those features? I do not need a Star wars light saber MAster Replicas, but I own one... Meaning, people buy possibilities but not use it. You don't seem to realize that AF performance is only one small factor in a DSLR's overall appeal. Pentax has a ton of advantages that N/C don't offer. Sorry, but it is like cars : how speed they can reach is not how good they are really. But at least, it makes a difference to average consumers. I always remember a group of young tourist, in the front of a store : the girl which to buy the Canon first price SLR, because it was branded Canon. But it was really on of the worse SLR in the world... Appeal is not easy to make people feel, if they do not know about photography. That is why we need advertising and good brand. It gives us some insurance... PS : I promess you one thing, from March 25th to 28th, I really have to front people that will be much more aggressive than myself... Guess why...
Re: no fate but what we make
I had rent a 300mm FA f/:2.8 when I try the AF speed of my MZS. This is really a great funny lens ! You can use it without tripod and the aperture is great !!! Have you forgotten that on the *ist-D the 300 has the same field of view as a 450 on 35mm? In such magnifications small angles at the source make big differences in the target. Kostas Nevermind, I will try it next week ! (just try not buy yet)
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christian Skofteland wrote: You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? this is getting really old. how many of you here sold your old gear to finance shiny new dslr? mishka I sold three MXen, an LX a SuperProgram, a P3 and several M and K lenses to finance the *ist D and couldn't be happier with my decision. Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
On 17/3/04, CLOVERSAN discumbobulated: Magnesium alloy body The EOS-D30/D60 had a metal substructure but a plastic main body. The EOS-10D now has robust magnesium alloy body which is cool to the touch, just like the EOS-1D/1Ds. Lets get the facts right please. ok, I just check the Canon website . But do you see that you give an argue against the *ist D ??? No, I see that I have simply corrected an error. I give no argument for or against. (PS : I do not disgorged, I am trying to discuss gently tough...) I just changed my attribution line in honour of Sir Edmund Blackadder, proving nothing if not insanity on my behalf. Salut, Cotty http://vintage-art-posters.junglewalk.com/Cotty-Poster-398868.asp ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: no fate but what we make
I'm not tripping over Pentax film SLRs either Pentax is not big in the market for anything but PSes True. I haven't seen a film *ist either. Of course I rarely see anyone with a film camera of any kind anymore, even though I'm sure millions of people are still using them. I happen to work in a pretty affluent area. You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? I'm probably not in Pentax's market, no. OTOH, I've considered buying a CANON to put my screwmount lenses on, so Pentax could yet get a sale out of me with the right camera. They might want to cater to guys who bought those lenses from Pentax 20+ years ago and are still buying Pentax lenses. If Cosina ever sold a DSLR with K-mount, it would be because they thought enough people would buy a camera for which they could get good lenses cheap on eBay. Forcing obsolesence to get people to buy new stuff is a poor solution, albeit a common one. Nikon has been forced to maintain backwards-compatability for its pro cameras, In this regard, Pentax offers a lot more compatability. all you need is the little A thingy on the lens. That's been around since 1983. Nikon pro cameras work to the full functionality of any Nikon lens made since 1959 (with some oddball exceptions). They work with full modern functionality with all lenses with CPUs in them, which would be 1986 or thereabouts and on, plus you can sometimes get CPUs hacked into older lenses by devious technicians. This is greater compatibility than Pentax, but to get it you have to buy the top-of-the-line Nikons. This is, BTW, the path I think Pentax should take--offer one DSLR and one film SLR with the mechanical connections to support the loyal customers with the good old lenses, and charge premium prices for these cameras. If that K18/3.5 is REALLY that important to you, you'll shell out for the camera that can use it. While I'd love to see mechanical connections in ALL cameras, I can see why Pentax would like to move beyond them. For the record, I like the *istD but I'm not going to get a Pentax DSLR unless it either gets a lot cheaper (so that it is a toy, essentially), or it gets a full-frame sensor. I'm not willing to pay real money for a camera with such major compromises given my collection of older Pentax gear. So for you this whole argument is moot! for the money the ist D is comparable to the 10D (same features same pixel count and same crop - kind of). I'd give the edge to the Canon, but primarily on system grounds rather than the features in the camera itself. I'm hoping that the argument will not always be moot. I'd really like to put those screw-mount lenses on a DSLR, and given the back focus it isn't going to be a Nikon. K to M42 adapters are readily availible, so I really am hoping for an eventual Pentax DSLR that I will feel is worth buying (for me). If you want a cheaper Toy then you'll buy the not so full featured baby-D as people on this list call it which I could almost guarantee would NEVER be compatible with K and M lenses. I can't see why Pentax would make a baby-D that had mechanical contacts, no. OTOH, the *istD is in some ways MORE compatible with my beloved screw-mount stuff than it is with the K/M lenses if you can tolerate working stopped down, and presumably a baby-D would continue this. I am also expecting the *istD to get cheaper eventually, perhaps even availible used which really knocks down the cost. DJE
Re: no fate but what we make
I'll qualify this. The APS sensor will be around for a long time. It will probably go up in resolution. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/16/04 06:44PM On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:11 PM, Steve Desjardins wrote: I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. I think they will last about as long as did the 64K computers with the sub 1 megahertz processors.
Re: no fate but what we make
I give them no more than fifteen years. John On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:09:30 -0500, Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'll qualify this. The APS sensor will be around for a long time. It will probably go up in resolution. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/16/04 06:44PM On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:11 PM, Steve Desjardins wrote: I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. I think they will last about as long as did the 64K computers with the sub 1 megahertz processors. -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: no fate but what we make
in the Pentax 3Q2003 report, it stated that they were reducing the forecast for 2004 digital camera sales of all types from 1.6 million to 1.4 million but keeping their revenue target the same. there are only a few ways to accomplish this. all of them involve selling more expensive cameras and fewer cheap ones. in fact, you can work the numbers and see that they expect to sell a lot fewer cheap cameras. in those same reports, they are pointing toward significantly increasing their DSLR sales and hint at announcing both a higher and a lower model DSLR to the *istD in 2004. this is all what Pentax themselves says, but what will come about because of market pressures or successes is another matter. Herb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:26 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make IS Pentax moving to DSLRs and away from digital PS cameras? Seems like every month they're introducing a new Optio. Or two. In contrast they've introduced one DSLR so far, ever, and that was a very slow introduction process.
Re: no fate but what we make
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004, Herb Chong wrote: in the Pentax 3Q2003 report, it stated that they were reducing the forecast for 2004 digital camera sales of all types from 1.6 million to 1.4 million but keeping their revenue target the same. there are only a few ways to accomplish this. all of them involve selling more expensive cameras and fewer cheap ones. Not necessarily. If you look at their new Optios, they're nothing more than slight modifications of the previous design. Pentax has more than likely already made their RD back on those bodies and is now raking in more pure profit from each Optio sold than they were last year. chris
Re: no fate but what we make
retooling isn't cheap, even minor ones. also, in the report states that they will significantly increase DSLR sales. that means decreasing PS sales. Herb - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:13 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make Not necessarily. If you look at their new Optios, they're nothing more than slight modifications of the previous design. Pentax has more than likely already made their RD back on those bodies and is now raking in more pure profit from each Optio sold than they were last year.
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pentax needs to please SOMEBODY with its cameras and lenses, or nobody will buy them. I'd suggest that loyal pentax users who still own lenses without A settings and cameras without AV dials would be a likely group for Pentax to sell future cameras and lenses to. If the stuff isn't backward compatible, why not just buy a Canon like everybody else? There are 70+ people on this list that have bought the *ist-D and that number will grow. This INCLUDES certain people who hate the fact that it is not compatible with their K and M lenses. The action of those people as well as ALL the other people that buy the camera, validates Pentax's future direction. The only fate we can make is to not purchase the camera and show Pentax that we want something different. This is clearly not happening. Apparently they ARE pleasing LOTS of people. If Pentax gets it wrong and does not please somebody, they HAVE no future. The camera market is not so monopolistic yet that the companies can push the future on us willy-nilly. Apparently they have pleased the people who are buying the D and the people who are reviewing it. And don't think that you aren't being pushed. Unless you work for Pentax product development, the future is what they want it to be, not what you want. I'm not hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. Not if people bought it it wouldn't. People are ALREADY buying the bodies WITHOUT full compatability Why make anything else? You are already validating the future! How can Pentax sell new lenses if all those people with 20+ year old lenses don't buy any new ones? Why should Pentax cater to people who will not give them new sales (in lenses; sure they might buy a new body, but, except for advanced PSers, each body = several lenses). For the record, I'm happy with the *ist-D and look forward to future developments in Pentax lenses and DSLRs. Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] My prediction for the future of Pentax DSLRs: No 24x36 sensors and no aperture rings. As a matter of fact, if Pentax releases more 35mm SLRs they won't need aperture rings either. And I'd put money on no new lenses having aperture rings as well. (they may still produce and sell older lenses with the rings, but no new designs will have them). Pentax is SHOWING us the future. We can bury our heads in the sand and ignore it or we can open Pentax needs to please SOMEBODY with its cameras and lenses, or nobody will buy them. I'd suggest that loyal pentax users who still own lenses without A settings and cameras without AV dials would be a likely group for Pentax to sell future cameras and lenses to. If the stuff isn't backward compatible, why not just buy a Canon like everybody else? If Pentax gets it wrong and does not please somebody, they HAVE no future. The camera market is not so monopolistic yet that the companies can push the future on us willy-nilly. eyes, accept it and move on. I'm holding my breath for another DSLR with the same basic features but higher pixel count I myself wonder what has taken the 9MP cameras so long to come out. Perhaps the camera companies are at last overstretched trying to maintain the current rate of new developments and introductions. Perhaps the real sales are not at the SLR level but the PS level anyway, where there IS some increase in pixel counts. and (maybe) some kind of in-the-body-IS. I'm not deluding myself into believing that Pentax will develop a line like Canon or even Nikon are and I'm certainly not thinking, I don't see a Pentax version of the D1 or EOS1 series, no. The LX was the only Pentax camera to ever try to compete at that level. That doesn't mean than Pentax couldn't build something more like a digital PZ-1P than a digital ME Super and sell it for $2000 or $2500. hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. Not if people bought it it wouldn't. DJE
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
From: Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pentax needs to please SOMEBODY with its cameras and lenses, or nobody will buy them. I'd suggest that loyal pentax users who still own lenses without A settings and cameras without AV dials would be a likely group for Pentax to sell future cameras and lenses to. If the stuff isn't backward compatible, why not just buy a Canon like everybody else? There are 70+ people on this list that have bought the *ist-D and that number will grow. This INCLUDES certain people who hate the fact that it is not compatible with their K and M lenses. But also excludes some people who have expressly said that they did not buy it because it isn't. The action of those people as well as ALL the other people that buy the camera, validates Pentax's future direction. The only fate we can make is to not purchase the camera and show Pentax that we want something different. Mostly, but not quite. We can call Pentax and complain. I'd like to think that people calling Pentax and complaining is what produced the firmware upgrade for the *istD that most of us think should have been part of the original design. Pentax can always choose not to listen to complaints from its users, but then they are just gambling that their brilliance will take the market by storm. Power zoom, anyone? This is clearly not happening. Apparently they ARE pleasing LOTS of people. Lots is a relative term. I'm not tripping over *istDs in the real world the way I'm tripping over Canon and Nikon DSLRs. In fact, the ONLY *istD I have seen in the real world is the one my girlfriend owns. I honestly wonder if Pentax are selling enough even to make it worth their while to produce the camera. If Pentax gets it wrong and does not please somebody, they HAVE no future. The camera market is not so monopolistic yet that the companies can push the future on us willy-nilly. Apparently they have pleased the people who are buying the D and the people who are reviewing it. And don't think that you aren't being pushed. Unless you work for Pentax product development, the future is what they want it to be, not what you want. My point was that if their vision of the future does not line up with what I want, I will not buy Pentax. Actually, this is sort of a non-issue in that I haven't bought anything NEW from Pentax since the late 1980s (since the SF-1 was NOT my vision of the future). However, those of you who DO buy new stuff from Pentax, or might but don't, ultimately have a lot of indirect say in the future of Pentax. Hopefully, this concept will get through to Nikon and Leica too, before Canon tramples them into the ground. I'm not hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. Not if people bought it it wouldn't. People are ALREADY buying the bodies WITHOUT full compatability Why make anything else? Perhaps more people would buy it WITH compatability. I'd love to see the sales figures for the *istD, because I don't get the impression it is a runaway hit outside this list. I don't see what the *istD has to offer a first-time buyer that the Canon and Nikon DSLRs don't, other than a K-mount. By the end of this week both Nikon and Canon will have cheaper options, too. How can Pentax sell new lenses if all those people with 20+ year old lenses don't buy any new ones? Make new lenses that are smaller, better, cheaper, and fuller featured. Those M lenses aren't ever going to autofocus, and even I can't see why Pentax should try to get them to work in P mode. Forcing obsolesence to get people to buy new stuff is a poor solution, albeit a common one. Nikon has been forced to maintain backwards-compatability for its pro cameras, because the pro users have enough investment in older Nikon glass to care. If all those guys have to buy a new 600/4 EDIF anyway, they're probably just going to ditch it all and buy Canon. Why should Pentax cater to people who will not give them new sales (in lenses; sure they might buy a new body, but, except for advanced PSers, each body = several lenses). Why should the user buy Pentax unless it either has features that others don't (which it does, in some ways) or he already has some Pentax gear that he'd like to use? I tell first-time SLR buyers to get a Canon because I honestly feel that starting from scratch it is the best thing to do. If either Nikon or Pentax maintained full compatability with older lenses I would recommend them instead. I shoot Nikon and Pentax myself, but if I were starting out now I might well buy a Canon (better lens lineup, better DSLRs, better technology, and any lens that mounts will work with full functionality). Besides, they can sell a lot of current Pentax users a new flash, a new zoom, etc with their *istD. At the moment they should have an easy time selling them a new wide-angle! For the record, I'm happy with the *ist-D
Re: no fate but what we make
Well, I do want to move up to higher resolution as it becomes affordable. I want a 24x36 sensor at 10 megapixels or more. I think we'll have it in less than two years. I had originally intended to wait for such a camera and forego the *ist-D. (Every once in a while Bill Robb reminds me that I called it a toy.) However, a friend of mine who shoots Canon showed me how nicely one could res-up a file from a 6.1 megapixel sensor. Then when Pentax introduced the firmware upgrade, I was a buyer. I hope that within two years the *ist-D will be my backup and travel body and that I'll be shooting most of my important work with a 10 plus Pentax camera. Paul On Mar 16, 2004, at 5:16 PM, Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Perhaps more people would buy it WITH compatability. I'd love to see the sales figures for the *istD, because I don't get the impression it is a runaway hit outside this list. I don't see what the *istD has to offer a first-time buyer that the Canon and Nikon DSLRs don't, other than a K-mount. By the end of this week both Nikon and Canon will have cheaper options, too. People who never owned a Pentax camera before on dpreview seem to be buying the *ist D for a couple of reasons: * They like the user interface and look and feel * They like the small size I expect that if you ask most members of this list why they bought a Pentax SLR in the first place that those would be two common answers. The other is probably the quality of lenses. I don't think that the *ist D is selling as well as the Canon 300D, but it also costs more and comes from a less well known (today) brand. Why should the user buy Pentax unless it either has features that others don't (which it does, in some ways) or he already has some Pentax gear that he'd like to use? I tell first-time SLR buyers to get a Canon because I honestly feel that starting from scratch it is the best thing to do. I tell people to buy what they are comfortable with. I personally wouldn't a Canon tomorrow if all of my gear was stolen. The cameras and lenses are big and I don't like their UI. I didn't own many of the lenses that I now carry around before buying the *ist D. I knew that this would probably be the case before buying the camera and did consider the other systems. My existing lens collection isn't what kept with me with Pentax, the size and UI of their cameras is what kept me. alex
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Lots is a relative term. I'm not tripping over *istDs in the real world the way I'm tripping over Canon and Nikon DSLRs. In fact, the ONLY *istD I have seen in the real world is the one my girlfriend owns. I honestly wonder if Pentax are selling enough even to make it worth their while to produce the camera. I'm not tripping over Pentax film SLRs either Pentax is not big in the market for anything but PSes My point was that if their vision of the future does not line up with what I want, I will not buy Pentax. Actually, this is sort of a non-issue in that I haven't bought anything NEW from Pentax since the late 1980s (since the SF-1 was NOT my vision of the future). However, those of you who DO buy new stuff from Pentax, or might but don't, ultimately have a lot of indirect say in the future of Pentax. You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? Forcing obsolesence to get people to buy new stuff is a poor solution, albeit a common one. Nikon has been forced to maintain backwards-compatability for its pro cameras, because the pro users have enough investment in older Nikon glass to care. If all those guys have to buy a new 600/4 EDIF anyway, they're probably just going to ditch it all and buy Canon. In this regard, Pentax offers a lot more compatability. all you need is the little A thingy on the lens. That's been around since 1983. Why should the user buy Pentax unless it either has features that others don't (which it does, in some ways) or he already has some Pentax gear that he'd like to use? I tell first-time SLR buyers to get a Canon because I honestly feel that starting from scratch it is the best thing to do. If either Nikon or Pentax maintained full compatability with older lenses I would recommend them instead. I shoot Nikon and Pentax myself, but if I were starting out now I might well buy a Canon (better lens lineup, better DSLRs, better technology, and any lens that mounts will work with full functionality). I have recommended Canon to some friends as well. One bought a RebelD the other a 10D. For the record, I like the *istD but I'm not going to get a Pentax DSLR unless it either gets a lot cheaper (so that it is a toy, essentially), or it gets a full-frame sensor. I'm not willing to pay real money for a camera with such major compromises given my collection of older Pentax gear. So for you this whole argument is moot! for the money the ist D is comparable to the 10D (same features same pixel count and same crop - kind of). If you want a cheaper Toy then you'll buy the not so full featured baby-D as people on this list call it which I could almost guarantee would NEVER be compatible with K and M lenses. Again, Pentax is not marketing to you. They are going after me and keeping me as a Pentax user by providing a product that works for me. If the ist-D hadn't been produced, I would have sold it all and gone to Canon. Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:11 PM, Steve Desjardins wrote: I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. I think they will last about as long as did the 64K computers with the sub 1 megahertz processors. I agree. We'll be using equipment with the same physical dimensions for a decade or more, although the internal electronics will improve. Expect the APS (and 4/3) sensors to be around for some time. Pixel counts will increase somewhat (to 12MP at least, and maybe higher if signal-to-noise ratio increases). Of course if Foveon becomes common a 12MP Foveon sensor would be a pretty darn good little option ...
Re: no fate but what we make
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why should the user buy Pentax unless it either has features that others don't (which it does, in some ways) or he already has some Pentax gear that he'd like to use? Well, why should a user buy into *any* system if it doesn't have advantages over other systems? I wrote a really long rant about this, but my @#$#$^ email program froze, and I don't feel like retyping it. The gist of it was that the *istD is the smallest and least expensive of the three big 6MP DSLR's (10D, D100, *istD). On top of that, it's the only one to offer HyperProgram and HyperManual. On top of *that*, it's the only one that uses AA batteries instead of expensive and proprietary Li-ions. It has the only grip that screws directly onto the camera without requiring you to remove the camera's battery first. It has the only grip that will work without batteries in it. Try it... leave the 4 AA's in the camera, attach the empty grip, and you'll find that you can use the vertical shutter button and all other grip functions. You can probably power an empty *istD with the batteries in the grip, too, but I haven't tried that yet. In any case, the *istD won't appeal to people wanting USM/AF-S, IS/VR and the ultimate in AF performance. But for the 99% of photographers who don't need those features on a regular basis, it will do just fine, and will even save them some space and money at the same time. chris
Re: no fate but what we make
On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:11 PM, Steve Desjardins wrote: I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. I think they will last about as long as did the 64K computers with the sub 1 megahertz processors. Note that the biggest influence in faster processor speeds has been the ability to place more transistors into the same physical area. This has allowed chips to have more transistors or a smaller die size, the former often makes them faster, and the latter makes them cheaper. FF sensors require bigger chips. Chip costs go up exponentially with size. alex
Re: no fate but what we make
Christian Skofteland wrote: You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? this is getting really old. how many of you here sold your old gear to finance shiny new dslr? mishka
Re: no fate but what we make
I wrote a really long rant about this, but my @#$#$^ email program froze, and I don't feel like retyping it. The gist of it was that the *istD is the smallest and least expensive of the three big 6MP DSLR's (10D, D100, *istD). Things change with the arrival of the D70 In any case, the *istD won't appeal to people wanting USM/AF-S, IS/VR and the ultimate in AF performance. But for the 99% of photographers who don't need those features on a regular basis, it will do just fine, and will even save them some space and money at the same time. The big question is : why pay somethimes a price quite same to other brand without these features ? Here in France the 80-200mm f/:2.8 is very very expensive, same price than the Canon/Nikon which have the Stab and the USM AFS. Things change : Konica Minolta switch to SSM also... but still expensive
Re: no fate but what we make
alex wetmore écrit: On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Paul Stenquist wrote: On Mar 16, 2004, at 6:11 PM, Steve Desjardins wrote: I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. I think they will last about as long as did the 64K computers with the sub 1 megahertz processors. Note that the biggest influence in faster processor speeds has been the ability to place more transistors into the same physical area. This has allowed chips to have more transistors or a smaller die size, the former often makes them faster, and the latter makes them cheaper. FF sensors require bigger chips. Chip costs go up exponentially with size. alex But I still hope to find two things : 1- *ist D new with APS C 8 Meg Pix (The Sony with 4th color) 2- *ist D full frame, such as the Canon 1DS or the Kodak 14n pro
Re: no fate but what we make
I sold half a dozen screw mount lenses, a Spotmatic motor drive, and a Spotmatic F to finance an *ist-D, a couple of flash cards, and a battery grip. I buy a lot of used gear on ebay. But when Pentax has something new that will work for me, I'll buy it. Paul On Mar 16, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Mishka wrote: Christian Skofteland wrote: You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? this is getting really old. how many of you here sold your old gear to finance shiny new dslr? mishka
Re: no fate but what we make
exactly. the secondary market is very relevant. just look (again) at cosina! mishka Paul Stenquist wrote: I sold half a dozen screw mount lenses, a Spotmatic motor drive, and a Spotmatic F to finance an *ist-D, a couple of flash cards, and a battery grip. I buy a lot of used gear on ebay. But when Pentax has something new that will work for me, I'll buy it. Paul On Mar 16, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Mishka wrote: Christian Skofteland wrote: You are not Pentax's market, then are you? They don't get any money from the used market, so why should they cater to people who buy 20+ year-old bodies and lenses on eBay? this is getting really old. how many of you here sold your old gear to finance shiny new dslr?
Re: no fate but what we make
Because they didn't realize that compatibility would sell more cameras. Now that they do I expect more compatibility. As should you. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1- *ist D new with APS C 8 Meg Pix (The Sony with 4th color) The Sony 8mp sensor that is used in the DSC-F828 is much much smaller than APS-C. It is 8.8mm by 6.6mm. Did Sony announce a 8mp APS-C sized sensor? alex
Re: no fate but what we make
On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wrote a really long rant about this, but my @#$#$^ email program froze, and I don't feel like retyping it. The gist of it was that the *istD is the smallest and least expensive of the three big 6MP DSLR's (10D, D100, *istD). Things change with the arrival of the D70 How so? The D70 isn't that much cheaper than the *istD, and it's an inferior camera in many ways. It's another plastic DSLR with a lousy viewfinder (only .75x magnification instead of Pentax's .95x), and no PC socket, .tiff mode, or MLU. It's a good camera for someone looking for a better plastic camera than the Digital Rebel, but it's still not built to the same calibre as the *istD. In any case, the *istD won't appeal to people wanting USM/AF-S, IS/VR and the ultimate in AF performance. But for the 99% of photographers who don't need those features on a regular basis, it will do just fine, and will even save them some space and money at the same time. The big question is : why pay somethimes a price quite same to other brand without these features ? One, it's not the same price, it's less expensive. Two, go back and re-read my email. There are many, many advantages to the *istD that other companies can't match, and for many people these are more important than USM/IS. You know, AF whizbang technology is great and all, but it's hardly the most important factor for most people. chris
Re: no fate but what we make
Pentax expects their DSLRs to outsell their film SLRs in two years at most. Herb... - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 5:11 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make But also excludes some people who have expressly said that they did not buy it because it isn't.
Re: no fate but what we make
i did. all my lenses but one. Herb... - Original Message - From: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 7:44 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make this is getting really old. how many of you here sold your old gear to finance shiny new dslr?
Re: no fate but what we make
in the US, the Pentax is more expensive. Herb - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 7:48 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make The big question is : why pay somethimes a price quite same to other brand without these features ? Here in France the 80-200mm f/:2.8 is very very expensive, same price than the Canon/Nikon which have the Stab and the USM AFS. Things change : Konica Minolta switch to SSM also... but still expensive
Re: no fate but what we make
Sorry, but not agree . Of course, they will sell more, but, more to pentax owners. The firmware was made in order to keep pentax users. If you own Pentax K or M or A, loosing the compatibility , an pentax user, will switch very easily to a 300D or a D70. ( if the lens cannot be used, why not use other brand ?) But also, more and more, people will switch easily, because DSLR mean change lens needed. You need the best lens for DSLR, that is something that is more and more evident. Because they didn't realize that compatibility would sell more cameras. Now that they do I expect more compatibility. As should you. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 8:01 PM Subject: Re: no fate but what we make Sorry, but not agree . Of course, they will sell more, but, more to pentax owners. The firmware was made in order to keep pentax users. If you own Pentax K or M or A, loosing the compatibility , an pentax user, will switch very easily to a 300D or a D70. ( if the lens cannot be used, why not use other brand ?) Or, a Pentax user may just as easily stay with a brand that has served them well over time. I find the presumption that not having compatability with a few lenses that are 3 decades old to be without merit. People have always bought Nikon or Canon (especially Nikon) because it's what the pro's use, whether the camera they are looking at has merit or not doesn't seem to matter. But also, more and more, people will switch easily, because DSLR mean change lens needed. Umm, sorry, but this sentence doesn't make sense. In English, it is just a bunch of random words. You need the best lens for DSLR, that is something that is more and more evident. I think Pentax stacks up pretty well in this regard. I left Nikon for Pentax because of the Pentax lenses, not the bodies, although the LX was a hell of a lot nicer camera in it's day than the F3 or F1. William Robb
Re: no fate but what we make
Hello Chris, I have to pretty much agree with you. I had already sold almost all my 35mm equipment quite awhile back so could have picked any body/system that I wanted. The *istD was more appealing for many of the features that you mentioned here. On top of that, I almost never use AF - I find that it tends to weaken my composition. So IS/USM are not at the top of my list of features. I love my *istD!!! Bruce Tuesday, March 16, 2004, 7:02:00 PM, you wrote: CB On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you own Pentax K or M or A, loosing the compatibility , an pentax user, will switch very easily to a 300D or a D70. ( if the lens cannot be used, why not use other brand ?) CB 1. *istD is better built, having a metal chassis instead of a plastic CB one. That's enough reason for me right there. CB 2. *istD has better viewfinder (.95x instead of .75x magnification) CB 3. *istD has pentaprism instead of pentamirror CB 4. I like Pentax glass and their SMC CB 5. *istD has the best battery grip CB 6. *istD has HyperProgram and HyperManual modes CB 7. *istD has a PC socket CB 8. *istD has MLU with the self timer CB 9. *istD is the smallest and lightest DSLR CB 10. *istD, even with firmware 1.0, still works fine with my screwmount CB lenses. CB There's ten reasons right there. Give me another 20 seconds and I can CB give you another ten. I wish people would stop slamming Pentax when they CB finally put out an impressive camera for a comparatively cheap price. CB Sure, Canon and Nikon will focus quieter and a bit faster if you buy their CB ultra-pricey USM/AF-S lenses, and IS/VR is certainly a cool feature, but CB how many people need those features? You don't seem to realize that AF CB performance is only one small factor in a DSLR's overall appeal. Pentax CB has a ton of advantages that N/C don't offer. CB chris
Re: no fate but what we make
Yes they will sell more cameras to Pentax lens owners. Which they wouldn't have otherwise. They would have let that potential market get away. Which is exactly what I said. The re-learned a lesson they had forgotten. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, but not agree . Of course, they will sell more, but, more to pentax owners. The firmware was made in order to keep pentax users. If you own Pentax K or M or A, loosing the compatibility , an pentax user, will switch very easily to a 300D or a D70. ( if the lens cannot be used, why not use other brand ?) But also, more and more, people will switch easily, because DSLR mean change lens needed. You need the best lens for DSLR, that is something that is more and more evident. Because they didn't realize that compatibility would sell more cameras. Now that they do I expect more compatibility. As should you. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
Re: no fate but what we make
Stephen said: Think about it this way: 1. If you have a bunch of older lenses you want to use, then Pentax makes no money on you since they don't make much money on the bodies. 2. If you are going to buy new stuff, then the bulk of the profit is on the DSLRs which will take the new lenses without aperture rings. 3. The firmware fix is good enough for most people. 4. The size of the remaining group is not enough to influence business decisions. Most of the money is made on the new technology. 5. Leica is neglecting a new technology not facing a back-compatibility issue. In general, I agree with your analysis (unfortunately). If Pentax makes $50 selling me a *istD to to with my lenses that is $50 more than they would have made if I bought a Canon and new lenses instead. I am also kind of surprised to see that Pentax may not be making money on the accessories, either. A lot of discussion on this list is recommending third party lenses and even third party flashes, presumably because they are cheaper or provide features that Pentax does not. If Pentax does not make much on the cameras and everybody is buying third party accessories, where does Pentax make money? The firmware fix may be good enough for its target market, and good enough to justify not putting the mechanical connections in to future cameras. Leica has almost no features to be backward compatible with, technologically speaking. It does not appear to be features that are the Leica selling point. Leica has neglected a lot of new technologies. I think the 6MP APS senors will be with us for quite a while. They will always be cheaper than the 24x35 sensors, and their is a market for cheaper SLRs. Therefore there will also be a market for these DA lenses for quite a while. As a matter of fact, APS 6mp might stick around so long that it becomes a permanent and not a stopgap format. If it stays cheaper enough, yes. Better DSLRs may all be full-frame, but there is always a market for cheaper stuff. DJE
Re: no fate but what we make
Ok ! I thought you was talking about new users... Yes they will sell more cameras to Pentax lens owners. Which they wouldn't have otherwise. They would have let that potential market get away. Which is exactly what I said. The re-learned a lesson they had forgotten. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, but not agree . Of course, they will sell more, but, more to pentax owners. The firmware was made in order to keep pentax users. If you own Pentax K or M or A, loosing the compatibility , an pentax user, will switch very easily to a 300D or a D70. ( if the lens cannot be used, why not use other brand ?) But also, more and more, people will switch easily, because DSLR mean change lens needed. You need the best lens for DSLR, that is something that is more and more evident. Because they didn't realize that compatibility would sell more cameras. Now that they do I expect more compatibility. As should you. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] The compatability of the *ist-D with my numerous K lenses is more than adequate for most of my needs. They have pleased me. which was EXACTLY my point. Why should Pentax make anything different? Christian
